Sujo Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 17 minutes ago, RideJocky said: Yes, everyone knew it was the video that set off the Benghazi attack. Everyone knrw after a million investigations there was a nothing burger. Hows them for apples. I expect Trey to apply the same dogged insistence that subpeonas are complied with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roobaa01 Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 bingo, bingo, bang, bang another bad day for dem egg heads ...documents reveal ukraine opened probe into hunter biden firm months before trumpy call. foxnews just now. wbr roobaa01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GroveHillWanderer Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 18 minutes ago, Sujo said: I expect Trey to apply the same dogged insistence that subpeonas are complied with. Indeed. Here's what Gowdy said about complying with a congressional inquiry during the Benghazi investigation. Quote The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles. Based on that principle, he should of course be urging the White House to hand over all the documents and information that has been requested and allow witnesses (such as Sondland) to appear. I won't hold my breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tippaporn Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 Just a few questions. Since it's confirmed that Schiff has had contact with the whistle blower prior to the filing of the complaint, which makes him a fact witness, then how is it that he can maintain his status as chairman and the face of this "investigation"? Does it bother people that even though he's disqualified himself from leading this "investigation" he refuses to recuse himself? I believe most everyone wants the U.S. to return to it's founding ideal of justice for all. Does it not fly in the face of that ideal to have a man leading an "investigation" of someone else's alleged wrong doing when he himself cannot abide by that ideal? Everything aside, I wanted to raise that single, standalone issue and ask the Americans here how they feel about the duality of Schiff's actions. https://www.foxnews.com/media/trey-gowdy-adam-schiff-has-made-himself-a-fact-witness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Becker Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 57 minutes ago, RideJocky said: Yes, everyone knew it was the video that set off the Benghazi attack. And I'm sure there are many things you're sure of that aren't correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said: Just a few questions. Since it's confirmed that Schiff has had contact with the whistle blower prior to the filing of the complaint, which makes him a fact witness, then how is it that he can maintain his status as chairman and the face of this "investigation"? Does it bother people that even though he's disqualified himself from leading this "investigation" he refuses to recuse himself? I believe most everyone wants the U.S. to return to it's founding ideal of justice for all. Does it not fly in the face of that ideal to have a man leading an "investigation" of someone else's alleged wrong doing when he himself cannot abide by that ideal? Everything aside, I wanted to raise that single, standalone issue and ask the Americans here how they feel about the duality of Schiff's actions. https://www.foxnews.com/media/trey-gowdy-adam-schiff-has-made-himself-a-fact-witness Gowdy has no say in who is or is not a witness. Only congress does. More deflection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 37 minutes ago, roobaa01 said: bingo, bingo, bang, bang another bad day for dem egg heads ...documents reveal ukraine opened probe into hunter biden firm months before trumpy call. foxnews just now. wbr roobaa01 And that has anything to do with trump asking a foreign govt to investigate biden how? U do know its not his firm dont u? He worked for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 4 hours ago, roobaa01 said: thats very easy ....the legal letter sent by the whouse legal counselor to pelosi on the 8.10.19 wbr roobaa01 Do you mean the letter that demands the investigation be conducted by the same rules as a trial? The one that allows the White House to cross-exam witnesses during the investigation? Do you think that's how it works in the real world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tippaporn Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 10 minutes ago, Sujo said: Gowdy has no say in who is or is not a witness. Only congress does. More deflection https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fact-witness/ A fact witness is a person with knowledge about what happened in a particular case, who testifies in the case about what happened or what the facts are. Fact witness testimony consists of the recitation of facts and/or events as opposed to an expert witness, whose testimony consists of the presentation of an opinion, a diagnosis, etc. If this ever gets to the Senate you can be darn sure Schiff will be called as a witness. Since he is a fact witness it should disqualify him to lead any prosecution. I would assume that Gowdy, a seasoned prosecutor, would know for certain and would not make a statement to that regard if it was indeed false. Taking Gowdy's word and Kevin McCarthy's word then what I posted is correct. Schiff should recuse himself. If anyone has factual information in contradiction then by all means present it. Otherwise I'm not interested in replying to posters responding with mere, unsupported speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 4 hours ago, Thomas J said: Compare what Trump did in his call with the Ukrainian President versus what Joe Biden in his own words said he did and tell me which one used his position unlawfully. Great job as fake news! In 2006 Bush was President, the Ukrainian revolution had not take place and Viktor Shokin was not the Ukrainian prosecutor. Your fake video also has an invalid url so it can not be replied to. Another newby poster presenting obvious lies. Russian trolls are getting careless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tippaporn Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/ Standard 3-1.6 Improper Bias Prohibited (a) The prosecutor should not manifest or exercise, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status. A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. A prosecutor should strive to eliminate implicit biases, and act to mitigate any improper bias or prejudice when credibly informed that it exists within the scope of the prosecutor’s authority. How many times has Schiff declared his bias towards Trump? Would this also be cause for Schiff to recuse himself? I'm thinking that given some of the known, indisputable facts surrounding this "investigation" we could all at least come to a unified consensus on certain points, independent of personal political persuasion. We are, after all, unified in a call for justice and that justice is performed fairly. So who here would differ in opinion that Schiff needs to recuse himself and on what basis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanrchase Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/ Standard 3-1.6 Improper Bias Prohibited (a) The prosecutor should not manifest or exercise, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status. A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. A prosecutor should strive to eliminate implicit biases, and act to mitigate any improper bias or prejudice when credibly informed that it exists within the scope of the prosecutor’s authority. How many times has Schiff declared his bias towards Trump? Would this also be cause for Schiff to recuse himself? I'm thinking that given some of the known, indisputable facts surrounding this "investigation" we could all at least come to a unified consensus on certain points, independent of personal political persuasion. We are, after all, unified in a call for justice and that justice is performed fairly. So who here would differ in opinion that Schiff needs to recuse himself and on what basis?You do know that this is an impeachment investgation and not a criminal court don't you?Sent from my SM-A500F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHolmesJr Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 11 hours ago, pegman said: Those Trump haters at FOX NEWS did a survey. Not looking good for him. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment They also have Bernie and his heart stents beating him by 8 points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolboy Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Tippaporn said: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/ Standard 3-1.6 Improper Bias Prohibited (a) The prosecutor should not manifest or exercise, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status. A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. A prosecutor should strive to eliminate implicit biases, and act to mitigate any improper bias or prejudice when credibly informed that it exists within the scope of the prosecutor’s authority. How many times has Schiff declared his bias towards Trump? Would this also be cause for Schiff to recuse himself? I'm thinking that given some of the known, indisputable facts surrounding this "investigation" we could all at least come to a unified consensus on certain points, independent of personal political persuasion. We are, after all, unified in a call for justice and that justice is performed fairly. So who here would differ in opinion that Schiff needs to recuse himself and on what basis? Nice try. Schiff is a member of the House of Representatives. He doesn't work for the executive branch. He's not a prosecutor. How exactly do you propose to find a nonpartisan member of the US House? These people are all elected. They run as partisans. By your standard, impeachment investigations would be impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 3 hours ago, Tippaporn said: https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fact-witness/ A fact witness is a person with knowledge about what happened in a particular case, who testifies in the case about what happened or what the facts are. Fact witness testimony consists of the recitation of facts and/or events as opposed to an expert witness, whose testimony consists of the presentation of an opinion, a diagnosis, etc. If this ever gets to the Senate you can be darn sure Schiff will be called as a witness. Since he is a fact witness it should disqualify him to lead any prosecution. I would assume that Gowdy, a seasoned prosecutor, would know for certain and would not make a statement to that regard if it was indeed false. Taking Gowdy's word and Kevin McCarthy's word then what I posted is correct. Schiff should recuse himself. If anyone has factual information in contradiction then by all means present it. Otherwise I'm not interested in replying to posters responding with mere, unsupported speculation. He is no leading any prosecution. Seriously on what planet do you get your information. The prosecution, impeachment hearing is done in the senate. He is not a senator. This is an investigation and congress alone determines how that is conducted. You have been told many times but you still dont get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Tippaporn said: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/ Standard 3-1.6 Improper Bias Prohibited (a) The prosecutor should not manifest or exercise, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status. A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. A prosecutor should strive to eliminate implicit biases, and act to mitigate any improper bias or prejudice when credibly informed that it exists within the scope of the prosecutor’s authority. How many times has Schiff declared his bias towards Trump? Would this also be cause for Schiff to recuse himself? I'm thinking that given some of the known, indisputable facts surrounding this "investigation" we could all at least come to a unified consensus on certain points, independent of personal political persuasion. We are, after all, unified in a call for justice and that justice is performed fairly. So who here would differ in opinion that Schiff needs to recuse himself and on what basis? What does a criminal prosecution have to do with an imoeachment hearing. Seriously you are getting way too boring with irrelevant deflections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolboy Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 Two Giuliani Associates Who Helped Him on Ukraine Arrested on Campaign-Finance Charges Two Soviet-born donors to a pro- Trump fundraising committee who helped Rudy Giuliani’s efforts to investigate Democrat Joe Biden were arrested late Wednesday on criminal charges of violating campaign finance rules and are expected to appear in court on Thursday, according to people familiar with the matter. Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two Florida businessmen, have been under investigation by the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan, and are expected to appear in federal court in Virginia later on Thursday, the people said. Both men were born in former Soviet republics. Mr. Giuliani, President Trump’s private lawyer, identified the two men in May as his clients. https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-foreign-born-men-who-helped-giuliani-on-ukraine-arrested-on-campaign-finance-charges-11570714188 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHolmesJr Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Sujo said: This is an investigation and congress alone determines how that is conducted. Exactly! And congress comprises not just 235 democrats....we also have 197 republican members of congress and 3 empty seats. So let's cut the $%&^ and VOTE! Even the 3 empty chairs would vote against this illegitimate, one-sided and rigged impeachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtls2005 Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 Clean up in aisle 3... National security officials raised concerns before Trump's Ukraine call: report At least four national security officials raised concerns to a White House lawyer over the Trump administration's attempts to pressure Ukraine before and immediately following President Trump's call with Ukraine's president, The Washington Post reported Thursday. It was not previously reported that officials raised concerns before the call with President Volodymyr Zelensky that resulted in a whistleblower complaint and impeachment inquiry into Trump. The Post reported that officials had been concerned by the May ouster of the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, conspiracy theories pushed by Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and signs in meetings that Trump wanted information that could hurt Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/465327-national-security-officials-raised-concerns-before-trumps-ukraine Just like Watergate, except with morons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 14 hours ago, JHolmesJr said: Exactly! And congress comprises not just 235 democrats....we also have 197 republican members of congress and 3 empty seats. So let's cut the $%&^ and VOTE! Even the 3 empty chairs would vote against this illegitimate, one-sided and rigged impeachment. Then blame republicans for changing the rules to allow this to happen. Just because you dont like it doesnt mean they cant do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Loh Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 9 minutes ago, Sujo said: Then blame republicans for changing the rules to allow this to happen. Just because you dont like it doesnt mean they cant do it. I hope the Dems just Ignore and don’t play into the Republicans game to prolong the impeachment inquiry. Do it to spite them. They asked for it when they change the rule to disadvantage the Dems. Now things has change in the house and no sympathy for the Trump’s lackey Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RideJocky Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 I hope the Dems just Ignore and don’t play into the Republicans game to prolong the impeachment inquiry.Exactly, they need to move ahead with this!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sujo Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 1 minute ago, RideJocky said: Exactly, they need to move ahead with this!!!! It would move very fast if trump decided to let people cooperate. Only himself to blame for dragging it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misty Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 22 hours ago, mtls2005 said: Just like Watergate, except with morons. And that's already a low bar... "Forget the myths the media's created about the White House. The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand. " - Deep Throat, All the President's Men Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelsall Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 On 10/10/2019 at 8:12 AM, pegman said: Those Trump haters at FOX NEWS did a survey. Not looking good for him. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment Same pollsters that said Hillary would win! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chomper Higgot Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 On 10/10/2019 at 10:55 PM, JHolmesJr said: Exactly! And congress comprises not just 235 democrats....we also have 197 republican members of congress and 3 empty seats. So let's cut the $%&^ and VOTE! Even the 3 empty chairs would vote against this illegitimate, one-sided and rigged impeachment. Let’s get the articles of impeachment and then vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chomper Higgot Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 What a difference a House Majority makes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabas Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said: What a difference a House Majority makes. Almost as big as a Senate majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckamuck Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 It seems like this issue is becoming a victim of the news cycle. Not much buzz anymore. Now it's Turkey and the Kurds. Monday it will be something new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 9 minutes ago, canuckamuck said: It seems like this issue is becoming a victim of the news cycle. Not much buzz anymore. Now it's Turkey and the Kurds. Monday it will be something new. No worries, Trump will stay in the news. he just can't keep his hands to himself and keeps on tweeting. And if not, he still has Giuliani, and if not that will be news. And in the mean time the impeachment investigation progresses steadily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.